WWW.LIVELAW.IN
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _______ OF 2018
BETWEEN: Disha Panchal & Ors.
... Petitioners AND
Union of India & Ors.
… Respondents
(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)
ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONERS:
ANAND SHANKAR JHA
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
INDEX Sl.
Particulars of Documents
Page No. of part to
No.
Remarks
which it belongs
(i)
(ii)
Part 1
Part II
(Contents
(Contents
of Paper
of file
Book)
alone)
(iii)
(iv)
1. Listing Performa
A-1 to A-2
2. Cover Page of Paper Book
A-3
3. Index of Record of
A-4
Proceedings 4. Limitation Report prepared by the Registry
A-5
5. Defect List
A-
6. Note Sheet
NS1 to …..
7. Synopsis, List of Dates &
B-
Events. 8. Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India with affidavits. 9. Annexure-“P-1” True Copy of Circular No. NUALS/CLAT2018/951/03/201 7 issued by Respondent No. 2 dated 20.12.2017. 10. Annexure-“P-2” True Copy of Instructions for submission
of
application
issued
online by
Respondent No. 2 dated NIL.
(v)
11. Annexure-“P-3” True Copy of Admit Cards of Petitioner No. 1 to 6 dated NIL. 12. Annexure-“P-4” True Copy of Article dated 20.04.2018
published
by
Express Web Desk of Indian Express. 13. Annexure- “P-5” True Copy of Article dated 21.04.2018 published by Zee Media Bureau. 14. Annexure- “P-6” True Copy of Article dated 13.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018 conducted server
today crashes,
amidst ruckus,
glitches Nationally published by
Online
Portal
Youthkiawaaz. 15. Annexure- “P-7” True Copy of Article dated 14.05.2018
published
by
LegallyIndia Online Portal. 16. Annexure- “P-8” True Copy of Article dated 14.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018 Mismanaged, Calls for Retest Echo Nationally published by Online Portal Youthkiawaaz. 17. Annexure- “P-9” True Copy of Article dated 15.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018
hits with technical glitches and mismanagement published by Education
Desk
of
Indian
Express, New Delhi. 18. Annexure- “P-10” True Copy of Article dated 15.05.2018 titled Tip of CLAT 2018 Iceberg keeps growing: At least 1400 Students have serious published
complaints by
Legally
as India
Online Portal 19. Annexure “P-11” True Copy of Representation dated 15.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 5 20. Annexure “P-12” True Copy of Representation dated 16.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 2 21. Annexure “P-13” True Copy of Representation dated 16.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 6 22. Annexure “P-14” True Copy of Representation dated 16.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 1 23. Annexure “P-15” True Copy of Representation dated 17.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 3 24. Annexure “P-16” True Copy of Representation dated 17.05.2018 submitted
by Petitioner No. 4 25. Urgency Affidavit 26. Letter of Urgency + Fresh Letter 27. Filing Memo 28. Vakalatnama
SYNOPSIS The present writ Petition is being preferred before this Hon‟ble Court to highlight various instances of grossly improper, arbitrary and negligent conduct of Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3, which is a single window entrance mechanism for admission into nineteen (19) prestigious National Law Universities across seventeen (17) states of Union of India. The manner in which such a highly competitive examination was conducted, has jeopardized the future of
thousands
of
students
who
appeared
for
this
examination held on 13.05.2018. Total apathy shown by Respondent No. 2 and 3 to a widespread outcry against technical glitches and mismanagement in CLAT 2018 requires immediate intervention by the Hon‟ble Apex Court.
Petitioners are students who appeared for CLAT 2018 examination after years of preparation and hard work. At the outset it must be noted that CLAT 2018 is an examination that is conducted on an online platform in designated test centers across the Country. All the students
are
mandatorily
expected
to
submit
their
responses on a web portal managed and hosted by an online vendor which is a third party appointed by Respondent No. 2 and 3. Apart from being a highly
competitive examination wherein about 60,000 students appeared on 13.05.2018, this examination is held within a limited time frame of 120 minutes wherein students are expected to answer 200 questions. These questions are based in a multiple choice format wherein a student has to click on the correct answer amongst options A, B, C or D. These questions appear in a linear manner, which is to say that the user has to click on the NEXT button on the screen to move to the next question, and after clicking on SUBMIT button to register a response. It is also pertinent to point out that this online platform has an in – built timer which is set at 120 Minutes. In this way, a student is awarded marks on the basis of the total number of questions attempted within the limited time frame.
Impeccable computer systems, server and infrastructural facilities at the examination center are preconditions for fair conduct of an examination which is conducted on an All India basis and which will conclusively decide the fate of over sixty thousand students, against a total of 2100 seats in the Undergraduate Program for B.A/ B.Sc/ B.Com/ B.B.A. LLB (Hons) courses . Loss of time by even 5 minutes in such an examination may put the effort of candidates to a naught. It must also be appreciated that difference of even 1 mark may result in significant variation
in
the
rank
list.
Viewed
in
light
of
such
circumstances
and
prerequisites,
the
lackadaisical
implementation of CLAT 2018 has severely jeopardized the future of students who have sacrificed precious years to get a fair chance for those 2 hours, which was conveniently taken away from them on account of gross negligence exhibited by the CLAT Convener. It is under these circumstances, that the Petitioners have been constrained to knock at the doors of this Hon‟ble Court. It is respectfully submitted that the Petitioners and thousands of other students faced severe hardships that vitiate the entire examination held by CLAT 2018 Core Committee. An indicative list of such mis-happenings and problems faced by the Petitioners is as follows: (a) Blank Screens whilst attempting the questions, for almost 10 minutes after commencement of examination. (b)
Regular
hanging/disruption
of
computer
systems
provided to the Petitioners. (c)
Electricity cut and Power Failures at several centers
across India. (d)
Problems in bio-metric verification of candidates.
(e)
Test timers continuing to run inspite of hanging of
/crashing of computer systems.
(f)
Direction given by the invigilators to shift from one
computer system to another while the exam was under progress, thereby causing irreparable loss to the students. (g)
Infrastructural issues such as extremely old hard
ware and mouse which was not fit to be used for a competitive examination such as the present one. (h)
Discrepancy in examination time allotted to different
candidates which varied from center to center at the individual discretion or whims of the invigilators in the concerned test center. (i) Non – adherence to the instructions contained in the Admission Card and non-observance of pre – testing of the computer systems to obviate any technical glitches during the conducting of the examination. (j) Absence of a uniform protocol to deal with the allotment of time, or extension of time in case of electric failure, or technical failure of the software, or any other alternative arrangement to make up for the valuable time lost. (k) No specific seats were allotted to the Petitioners and the Petitioners were made to sit on random computer systems which were presumed to be working properly as per the Respondents.
These issues were faced by thousands of students and led to huge public outcry. Several newspapers, websites and social media platforms have repeatedly raised concerns about
gross
mismanagement
of
the
examination.
A
number of articles were carried by Indian Express, Zee Media, Legally India, Bar and Bench and Youth Ki Aawaz highlighting the concerns of students across India. In an interview published by Legally India on 14.05.2018, Respondent No. 3 reportedly gave a statement as follows: “We are looking into each and every report. At 1.5% (of
the
total)
centers
computers
failed
and
immediately (the candidates) were given the time. I manually look into the computer login report.”
This statement amounts to a clear admission that CLAT 2018 was marred by severe technical problems. Even if it is assumed that problem was faced by only 1.5% of the total students it would mean that about 850 students were clearly denied an opportunity to participate in CLAT 2018 in a fair, effective and transparent manner. This itself is a sufficient
ground
to
quash
the
entire
examination.
However as is evident, the erros and omissions were deliberate and negligent, and a clear attempt is made by Respondent No. 3 to underplay the magnitude of problems that have been caused in conducting the examinations. In the aftermath of the examinations, various Writ Petitions
came to be preferred across various High Courts by individual students bringing into light all the maladies that have occasioned on account of the negligence of the invigilators, poor conditions of the test centers, apathetic attitude of the Convener CLAT 2018, as well as serious problems with the softwares and the online platform relied on to conduct the examination which clearly demonstrates that
the
problem
is
extremely
severe
immediate judicial intervention so as to
and
requires
save precious
futures.
In
further
blatant
disregard
of
aspirations
of
the
Petitioners, the Respondent No. 2 and 3 have failed to even acknowledge the representations submitted by them. It is indeed regrettable to note that even now neither an expert committee has been appointed nor any statement has been issued disclosing the steps
taken by the
Respondent No. 2 and 3 to protect the interest of the Petitioners and hundreds of similarly situated students. Respondent
2
and
3
cannot
be
permitted
to
take
advantage of their own wrong and the shield of limited time
schedule
for
the
examination.
This
deliberate
executive inaction by Respondent No. 2 and 3 hits at the very basis of the principles of accountability, fair play, transparency and is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The present Petition is filed in the interests of justice. A number of Writ Petitions have already been filed by students in several High Courts in respect of similar grievances. This writ petition has been preferred to bring to the notice of this Hon‟ble Court a systematic, procedural negligence carried out at an institutional level, which has effaced any semblance observed
of while
transparency conducting
or an
accountability all
India
to
be
entrance
examination. The instant Writ Petition attempts to bring out the arbitrary,
opaque,
unreasonable
and
hopeless
implementation of CLAT conducted by the respondents herein. Although the popularity amassed by CLAT is on a steady rise, the planning and implementation of conducting the All India Examination is marred with serious flaws from the choice of technical partner to an abrupt and sudden change in the software platform within weeks before the conduct of examination without actually giving in a reasonable amount of time to the candidates to get used to the software. The delay in the online application form due to technical errors further suggests that the software wasn‟t free from errors.
Therefore, owing to all the technical glitches, inefficient management,
and
the
incompetent
conduction
of
a
national level entrance examinations, the Petitioner seeks the immediate intervention of this Hon‟ble Court to address the grievances of thousands of candidates whose rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India have been blatantly violated. Hence, the present petition.
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS 2014 - 2017
Petitioners
are
students
aspiring
to
join
prestigious National Law Schools set up in various states of India. In year 2007, the Vice Chancellors of seven National Law Universities namely,
National
University University National
Law
(NLSIU) of
Law
Law
School
of
Bangalore, (NALSAR)
Institute
India
NALSAR
Hyderabad,
University
(NLIU)
Bhopal, West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS), Kolkata, National Law University (NLU) Jodhpur, Hidayatullah National Law University (HNLU) Raipur and Gujarat
National
Law
University
(GNLU)
Gandhinagar entered into a Memorandum of Understanding for establishment of a Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”). Further in year 2014 another Memorandum of Understanding was executed by then existing sixteen whereby
(16) the
National above
Law
mentioned
Universities seven
(7)
National Law Universities along with Dr. Ram Manohar
Lohia
National
(RMNLU)
Lucknow,
Rajiv
Law Gandhi
University National
University of Law (RGNUL) Patiala, Chanakya
National
Law
University
(CNLU)
Patna,
National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi, National Law University Odisha (NLUO) Cuttack, National University of Study and Research in Law (NUSRL) Ranchi, National Law University Assam (NLUJAA) Guwahati, Damodaram University
Sanjivayya (DSNLU)
National
Law
Vishakhapatnam
and
Tamil Nadu National Law School (TNNLS) Tiruchirapalli
entered
into
a
fresh
Memorandum of Understanding for conducting Common Law Admission Test. Further,
three
(3)
more
National
Law
Universities namely Maharashtra National Law University
(MNLU-
Mumbai)
Mumbai,
Maharashtra National Law University (MNLUAurangabad) Aurangabad and National Law University (NLU-Nagpur) Nagpur have also joined in and are participating in conduct of Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”). 20.12.2017
As
per
the
Understanding
terms
of
between
Memorandum National
of Law
Universities, Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) is conducted by rotation depending on the year of establishment of the respective
National Law Universities. Accordingly, the first Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) was conducted in year 2008 National Law School of India University (NLSIU) Bangalore. On
20.12.2017,
National
University
of
Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi issued a circular bearing circular number NUALS/ CLAT 2018/951/03/2017 inviting applications for admissions to the Under Graduate and Post Graduate Degree programmes in Law in the Nineteen (19) National Law Universities in India.
As
per
this
circular,
the
basic
educational qualification was set out for Under Graduate
programme
and
Post
Graduate
programme. The date for commencement of submission
of
Online
Application
was
01.01.2018 and the last date for submission was fixed for 31.03.2018. The date for holding Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 was 13.05.2018. All the students were instructed to visit the official website of CLAT 2018 (www.clat.ac.in) for detailed instructions including Syllabus, Eligibility, Exam Pattern and list of important dates and instructions.
22.09.2017
The National University of Advanced Legal Studies
(NUALS),
Kochi,
the
Respondent
herein which on the basis of rotation were to conduct
CLAT
2018,
announced
the
examination date on its official website. 01.01.2018
The online CLAT portal started to accept applications
of
students
for
the
Under
Graduate and Post Graduate courses of Law. All the aspirants were mandatorily required to submit online application and all the necessary instructions and notifications were conveyed through the online portal itself. The procedure for filling up the application form was set out on the online CLAT portal. The National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi was the designated University
for
conducting
Common
Law
Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018. Hon‟ble ViceChancellor of NUALS Kochi was appointed as the Convener of CLAT 2018 Core Committee being the Vice-Chancellor of the conducting University. Hon‟ble Vice-Chancellor(s) of all Nineteen (19) participating Universities were members in the CLAT 2018 Core Committee.
Another Committee, namely the CLAT 2018 Implementation smooth
Committee
implementation
was of
setup
CLAT
for
2018
comprising of Registrar(s) of all Nineteen (19) National Law Universities. 31.03.2018
As on the last date for submission of online application 60,000
i.e.,
31.03.2018
students
from
all
approximately parts
of
India
submitted their duly filled in application forms and deposited requisite fees to appear for CLAT 2018. Petitioners had also submitted their
application
necessary
fee
forms
deposit.
and
made
is
pertinent
It
the to
mention that the cost of the Application Form was about Rs. 4,000 per candidate. This amount when tallied against the total strength of the students would roughly come down to Rs. 24 Crores. This clearly demonstrates that for the 2018 Edition of CLAT, NUALS Kochi had sufficient
funds
to
conduct
the
All
India
Entrance Examination in a fair and transparent manner. 20.04.2018
As per the instruction made available on the online portal of CLAT 2018, students were instructed to download their Admit Cards/Hall
Tickets starting from 20.04.2018. However, the petitioners noticed that Respondent No. 2 and 3 had uploaded a Disclaimer on the website stating as follows: “Owing to some technical reasons, the downloading
of
Admit
Card
will
commence only from April 26, 2018.” Note: It is relevant to mention that CLAT 2018 was expected to be a completely online examination. All the instructions prior to the exam were also to be issued through the online portal itself. That right from the very beginning there were several technical mishappenings
which
ultimately
resulted
in
extremely poor, unfair and arbitrary conduct of CLAT 2018. 26.04.2018
Petitioners and all the other students were able to download their Admit Cards from the website of CLAT 2018 and the said Admit Card came with a particular set of instructions for online examination. It is relevant to mention that the entire interface for CLAT 2018 Examination was modified by Respondent No. 2 and 3. There
was
a
remarkable
shift
from
the
online
interface followed from 2015 i.e., the year when CLAT was first conducted as an online examination. Petitioners,
To a
new
the
surprise
testing
of
the
interface
was
presented inter alia with section tags and detags that caused serious problem to all the students
appearing
for
the
examination
including the Petitioners herein. That the instructions issued along with the admit cards was the first instance of communication of such sweeping changes made by Respondent No. 2 and 3 for online CLAT examination 2018. 13.05.2018
Petitioners
appeared
for
CLAT
2018
examination at their respective centers. About 58,000 students appeared for the CLAT 2018 examination in a total of 260 examination centers set up across India. This examination was conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3 with the aid and assistance of a private company namely M/s Sify Technologies Ltd. That the students across various states of India faced serious problems in almost 200 online
examination
centers.
The
problems
included power cuts, failure of log-in system,
slow
biometric
verification,
blank
screens,
substantial loss of time in system log-ins, dysfunctional tabs, particularly the ones which enabled
a
student
to
“SUBMIT”
his/her
response or to move to the “NEXT” question after the response was submitted, overhaul of software interface, lack of adequate number of additional computers for emergency purposes, functioning of the timer, unprofessional and negligent
response
of
the
invigilators.
Primarily these difficulties led to significant loss of time (averaging about 5-30 minutes from student to student) which has totally vitiated
the
very
essence
an
online
competitive exam of 120 minutes wherein a student is expected to answer 200 questions. Roughly, a little over 1 Minute per question is the optimum speed required to be maintained in an examination of such nature. To lose 30 minutes would result in ouster from the competition itself, considering as many as over 100 students could lie on the same rank, which may differ by One Mark. In such a highly competitive and rigorous examination, loss of time essentially means fait accompli for the aspirations of any student. It is relevant to
mention that the ranking of a student can slip by thousand or more ranks by a simple difference of one or two incorrect answers/ un-attempted circumstances
questions. when
the
In
severe
such technical
lapses are viewed, it essentially means gross violation of fundamental rights of students under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In addition to these gross technical problems, students faced several other issues such as extremely poor infrastructure of examination centers, lack of proper guidance from staff recruited by the examination centers and several
instances
of
unfair
conduct
of
examination. For instance, at an examination center at Hissar, Haryana, few students were seen attempting the examination till 7:00 PM whereas the exam was expected to conclude at 5:00 PM itself. Whereas in other centers across the Country, there have been instances when on account of the technical problems being faced by a student, an initial promise was made by the invigilator to grant extended time, but the same was abruptly truncated by
the invigilator, thereby granting only an hour and
a
half
examination. invigilators
to In
complete
the
some
serious
test
center
and
entrance
cases,
the
coordinators
resorted to coercion to shut down the test without giving any extra time or opportunity on account of the time lost by a student. In essence, it is submitted that Petitioners and thousands of other similarly situated students were compelled to take the examination under grossly unfair conditions that has all the makings of seriously jeopardizing their result. The final outcome or rank list prepared out of such an examination is bound to be erroneous and grossly unjust. 14.05.2018
An interview of Vice-Chancellor of NUALS Kochi
was
published
(www.legallyindia.com)
by
website
wherein
namely it
was
reported that 98.5% of CLAT 2018 went smoothly and that there have been reports regarding the computes crashing at some of the centers. Assuming the figures to
be
correct, it can be safely concluded that about thousand (1000) students admittedly faced technical
difficulties
which
is
a
sufficient
ground for cancellation of entire CLAT 2018 examination. It has to be noted that CLAT 2018 is a competitive examination wherein ranking of students significantly varies even in a gap of 1 or 2 marks. In such circumstances, if about thousand (1000) students were not given
fair
opportunity
for
attempting
the
examination, it would lead to entire rank list being unfair and unjust. 14.05.2018
Gross technical errors and unfair conditions of examination lead to widespread public outcry. Several
newspapers,
websites,
blogging
portals reported of remarkably poor conduct of CLAT 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3. This includes articles published in Indian Express, Youth Ki Awaaz, Legally India, Lawoctopus, Bar and Bench, Zee Media etc.
Petitioners are constrained to prefer this Writ Petition in Public Interest setting out their grievances and instances of violation of their fundamental rights. Additionally, it is also stated that students from more than 20 states are gravely prejudiced by unfair, unjust and mismanaged
conduct
of
CLAT
2018
by
Respondent No. 2 and 3. In view of the time constraints under which the Petitioners are operating, the present Petition is filed by 6 students from two (3) different states i.e., Delhi,
Uttar
Pradesh
and
Chhattisgarh.
However, more than 500 similarly situated students are likely to join the present Petition in immediate future. 15.05.2018
That a number of online platforms including Twitter and Facebook carried hundreds of discussions
about
mismanagement
and
technical glitches that vitiated the entire CLAT 2018
examination.
A
Google
Form
Questionnaire was uploaded on the internet seeking response of genuine exam takes and students who appeared for CLAT 2018. It is appalling to mention that within a of the Google Form/Questionnaire going online, more than one thousand (1000) have reported issues about technical glitches, infrastructural short comings and illegalities committed in conduct of CLAT 2018. 15.05.2018
A
Civil
Writ
12792/2018,
Petition,
being
CWP
no.
titled Pranjal Goel v. Union of
India & Others before Hon‟ble High Court of
Punjab & Haryana was filed by a Haryanabased CLAT aspirant, Pranjal Goel, under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, alleging that he lost approximately 30 minutes during his test owing to technical glitches. 16.05.2018
Out of the seven students who filed a police complaint in Jaipur, two of them, Akshay Jain and Mansi Jain, filed a Writ Petition, being CWP no. 10818/2018 titled Akshay Jain & Another v. NUALS & Others. The petitioners prayed for: (i) an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to reconduct the CLAT - 2018 examination or provide to the Petitioners with such extra marks, and (ii) passing of any other writ, order or directions to which the Petitioners may be entitled to in the circumstances of the case be issued in their favour. The Hon‟ble High Court was pleased to issue notice in the matter.
19.05.2018
Hence, the present Petition.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF: 1.
Disha Panchal
D/o Shri Satish Panchal House No. 13408, Ram Nagar Extension Street No. 5, Mandoli Road Shahdara, Delhi – 110032
Contesting Petitioner No. 1
2. Tapan Gaur S/o Shyam Sunder Sharma 57, Second Floor, Sharda Niketan Pitampura, New Delhi – 110034
Contesting Petitioner No. 2
3. Vritant Garg S/o Ruchir Garg L-25,Behind RKC, Krishna Nagar, Danganiya, Raipur – 492001
Contesting Petitioner No. 3
4. Animesh Shukla S/o Vijay Kumar Shukla Ramkrishan Villa, Ward 69, Behind Parshv Vihar, Gol Chowk, Rohinipuram,
Contesting Petitioner No. 4
Raipur – 492001 5. Shivam Shandilya S/o Sarvendra Krishna Tripathi 1485, Block No. C, Indira Nagar Lucknow (UP) – 226016
Contesting Petitioner No. 5
6. Sanya Sethi D/o Ajay Sethi 13 N 52, Govind Nagar Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) – 208006
Contesting Petitioner No. 6
Versus 1. Union of India Through the Secretary Ministry of Human Resource Development Shastri Bhawan Dr Rajendra Prasad Road
Contesting
New Delhi - 110001
Respondent No. 1
2. The National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi “CLAT 2018 – Organizing University” Through its Registrar NUALS Campus, HMT Colony
Contesting
P.O. Kalamassery, Kochi
Respondent No. 2
Kerala – 683503 3. Core Committee – Common Law Admission Test 2018 Through its Convener Vice-Chancellor, National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi NUALS Campus, HMT Colony P.O. Kalamassery, Kochi
Contesting
Kerala – 683503.
Respondent No. 3
To, Hon‟ble The Chief Justice of India and His Hon‟ble Companion Justices of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India The
Humble
Petition
of
Petitioners Abovenamed:
the
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
(1)
The Petitioners are constrained to approach this Hon‟ble court and invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article
32
of
Constitution
of
India
seeking
urgent
intervention of this Hon‟ble Court against grossly unfair, negligent and mismanaged conduct of Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3 herein. It is most respectfully submitted that the instant petition that has been preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution
for
the violation of the rights of the
Petitioners guaranteed under the Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The acts and omissions of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 have violated fundamental rights of the Petitioners as well as several other similarly placed students who have also appeared for Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 for admissions to Under Graduate and Post Graduate courses offered by National Law Universities across India.
(1A)
That the Petitioners are approaching this Hon‟ble Court under Article 32 of Constitution of India since conduct of Common
Law
Admission
Test
(“CLAT”)
2018
by
Respondent No. 2 and 3 was evidently improper, unfair and unjust which has caused grave prejudice to the Petitioners and other similarly placed students based
across various states of India. Due to paucity of time and stringent examination schedule, this Petition at present is being filed by six Petitioners (6) Petitioners/ Students (two (2) from Delhi and two (2) from Chhattisgarh and two (2) from Uttar Pradesh). However, students from more than fifteen (15) states are likely to join the present Petition in near future. Further, the present Petition is expected to have widest ramification since participating National Law Universities in seventeen (17) different states are integral part of Common Law Admission Test 2018
Core
Committee
represented
through
their
respective Vice-Chancellor(s). The relief sough against the Respondent No. 2 and 3 cannot be granted by individual Hon‟ble High Courts. Thus, the present Petition is being filed before this Hon‟ble Court. (2) That the present Petition is filed for seeking limited reliefs in relation to conduct of CLAT 2018 examination, wherein egregious lapses on the part of Respondent No. 2 and 3 in conduct of the examination has jeopardized aspirations of thousands of future Law students who seek admission into the prestigious National Law Universities across India. In short, the problems related to conduct of online examination
(issues
including
hanging
of
computer
systems, numerous power cuts, difficulty in login, blank screens, errors in biometric verification, non adherence to mandatory conducting of a pre – test to avoid any
technical glitches, amongst other issues) which was faced by
thousands
of
students
has
vitiated
the
entire
examination. Respondents are well aware of the large scale public outcry by students and their parents. However, none of the emails/ letters/ representations/ submitted have been looked into much less addressed by Respondent No. 2 and 3. Thus, in the interest of justice it is essential that CLAT 2018 should be reconducted failing which the entire result of CLAT 2018 examination is bound to be erroneous and grossly unjust.
(3) It is respectfully submitted that the present Petition stands on a different footing and is in no manner related to the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 600 of 2015 titled Shamnad Basheer Versus Union of India, wherein different set of relief have been sought before this Hon‟ble Court. Further, the present Writ petition is urgent in nature and deserves immediate intervention since the result of CLAT 2018 examination is likely to be published by May 31, 2018.
(4) The Petitioners herein are citizens of India. Petitioners are aspiring law students and thus had appeared in CLAT 2018 which was conducted on 13.05.2018. A snap shot of name, parent age, roll number, examination center,
problems faced and steps taken by the Petitioners are as follows: S. No
1.
Name, Father’s Name, Roll Number and Centre of Examination of the Student Disha Panchal D/o Shri Satish Panchal
Representation made before the concerned authorities pertaining to the grievances as mentioned
Email to the Vice- Chancellor, the Registrar and the Admission Incharge of NUALS, Kochi dated 16/05/2018, mentioning the grievances as under:
Roll No: 10004685, Examination Center: RR Assessment Center, Z36, 2nd Floor, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase 2, Near Harkesh Nagar, Okhla Metro Station, New Delhi 110020
i.
Initially at 3:00 PM, questions were not displayed on the test screen
ii.
Questions kept disappearing from the main screen because of technical problems in the software interface.
iii.
Moving from one question to another was very cumbersome and took a lot of time on account of dysfunctionality in the NEXT button/tab.
iv.
The invigilators were unhelpful, asked to shut the computers, restart and login again thereby wasting invaluable time of the students.
v.
Finally, the computer could only start at 3: 35 PM when the time remaining was only 1 hour and 25 minutes
2.
Tapan Gaur S/o Shyam Sunder Sharma Roll No. 10000943 Examination Center: Apex Online Solution, Lal Kothi, Chauhan Complex, Sanjay Colony, Sohana Road, Lal Kothi, Faridabad, Haryana 121005
vi.
At 5:00 PM, submitted.
paper
was
vii.
Petitioner requested the invigilator for 35 minutes extra which the petitioner lost initially on account of technical glitches in the system, and for no fault of his own.
viii.
Invigilator asked the petitioner to wait at the examination hall.
ix.
At around 7:00 PM, i.e., after two hours of submission, petitioner was allotted 10 minutes, in which the petitioner faced the same technical problems.
Email to the Vice- Chancellor and the Registrar of NUALS, Kochi dated 16/05/2018, mentioning the grievances as under: i.
The mouse was malfunctioning, the Petitioner had to click it at least twice or thrice to reach to the next question.
ii.
Thumb prints and signatures were not taken before the formalities were to be observed, but was in fact taken during the allotted 120 minutes‟ time limit which resulted in precious waste of time.
3.
Vritant Garg S/o Ruchir Garg
iii.
A lot of students' exam commenced before others (due to there being no official announcement of the start of the exam) and hence a lot of students saw the questions from other screens and solved them before they started their own exam.
iv.
Exam didn't start on time. There was no uniformity of the commencement or conclusion of the examination within a particular center.
v.
Screens were crashing a lot of times while the timer was still running, thereby causing serious loss of time to the Petitioner who had to log in every time the screen crashed, restarting the system all over again, logging in as going back to the question which was being attempted. Every single “fresh log in attempt” conveniently caused a loss of over 10 minutes on an average.
Email to the Registrar of NUALS, Kochi dated 17/05/2018, mentioning the grievances as under:
Roll No. 10017390 Examination Center; Rungta Engineering College, Ward No. 1, Veer Sawarkar Nagar,
i.
Initially at 3:00 PM, questions were not displayed on the test screen
ii.
Questions kept disappearing
Behind Nandan Van, Raipur, Chhattisgarh492009
4.
Animesh Shukla S/o Vijay Shukla
Kumar
from Screen. iii.
Invigilators were unhelpful, asked to shut the computers, restart and login again.
iv.
Finally, computer started at 3:10 PM when only 1 hour and 50 minutes was remaining for the petitioner.
v.
No extra time was allotted against the loss of 10 minutes.
vi.
After the exam, petitioner signed the application which mentions about the delay and technical lacunas.
Email to the Vice- Chancellor, the Registrar and the Admission Incharge of NUALS, Kochi dated 17/05/2018, mentioning the grievances as under:
Roll No. 10022585 Examination Center: Rungta Engineering College, Ward No. 1, Veer Sawarkar Nagar, Behind Nandan Van, Raipur, Chhattisgarh492009
i.
Initially at 3:00 PM, questions were not displayed on the test screen
ii.
Questions kept disappearing because of technical problems.
iii.
The invigilators were unhelpful, asked to shut the computers, restart and login again.
iv.
Finally, computer was started at 3: 11 PM when only 1 hour and 49 minutes
was remaining petitioner. v.
5.
Shivam Shandilya S/o Sarvendra Krishna Tripathi
for
the
No extra time was allotted against the loss of 11 minutes.
Email to the Registrar, NUALS, Kochi dated 15/05/2018, mentioning the grievances as under:
Roll No.10037193
i.
Partiality in tile allotment.
Examination Center: R R Institute of Modern technology, NH-24, Bahisamau Crossing, Bakshi Ka Talab, Sitapur road, Near Bhaisamau Crossing, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226201
ii.
Technical glitches.
iii.
Provided only 1 hour and 30 minutes
to
attempt
the
examination. iv.
Had to shift the computer for 4 times.
v.
Problem
in
bio-metric
verification.
6.
Sanya Sethi D/o Ajay Sethi
Email to the Registrar, NUALS, Kochi dated 16/05/2018, mentioning the grievances as under:
Roll No. 10017671 i. Technical Glitches. Examination Center: Unzip Technologies LLP, L/PR-9, Keshavpuram Kalyanpur, VijaynagarKalyanpur Road, Near Katyayan School, Kanpur, Uttar
ii. Infrastructural lacunas. iii. Center incharge was least co-operative. iv. Questions were not displayed for initial 5-10 minutes.
Pradesh- 208001.
(5)
v. Problem of blank screen was faced many times during the examination.
The Respondents herein are „State‟ under Article 12 of Constitution of India and public authority against whom a Writ Petition can be maintained under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Respondent No. 1 is the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union of India. Respondent No. 2 is the Registrar of National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi. The said University namely NUALS, Kochi is the organizing University which was responsible for conducting CLAT 2018 examination. Respondent No. 3 is the CLAT 2018 Core Committee represented by its Convener i.e., ViceChancellor of NUALS, Kochi. Therefore, the actions of the Respondents
constitute
a
serious
violation
of
the
sacrosanct rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India to various prospective law students, including the right to guard against arbitrary actions of the state cherished
and
protected
under
Article
14
of
the
Constitution of India and the right to education and other connected rights within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
(6)
It is relevant to mention that the CLAT 2018 Core Committee comprised of sitting Vice-Chancellor(s) of 19 different National Law Universities. These 19 National Law Universities and 35 private Colleges/ Universities draw upon the results published by Respondent No. 2 and 3 for admitting students to the Under Graduate and Post Graduate courses in the discipline of Law. Further, some public sector undertakings short list candidates
for
interview rounds based on the Post Graduate results of Common Law Admission Test. A.
Relevant facts
(6)
The relevant facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as follows:
6.1
Petitioners are students aspiring to join prestigious National Law Schools set up in various states of India.
6.2
In year 2007, the Vice Chancellors of seven National Law Universities
namely,
National
Law
School
of
India
University (NLSIU) Bangalore, NALSAR University of Law (NALSAR) Hyderabad, National Law Institute University (NLIU)
Bhopal,
Juridical
West
Sciences
Bengal
(NUJS),
National Kolkata,
University National
of Law
University (NLU) Jodhpur, Hidayatullah National Law University (HNLU) Raipur and Gujarat National Law University
(GNLU)
Gandhinagar
entered
into
a
Memorandum of Understanding for establishment of a Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”).
6.3
In year 2014, another Memorandum of Understanding was executed by then existing Sixteen (16) National Law Universities whereby the above mentioned Seven (7) National Law Universities along with Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University (RMNLU) Lucknow, Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law (RGNUL) Patiala, Chanakya National Law University (CNLU) Patna, National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi, National Law University Odisha (NLUO) Cuttak, National University of Study and Research in Law (NUSRL) Ranchi, National
Law
University
Assam
(NLUJAA)
Guwahati,
Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University (DSNLU) Vishakhapatnam and Tamil Nadu National Law School (TNNLS) Tiruchirapalli, entered into a fresh Memorandum of Understanding for conducting Common Law Admission Test. 6.4 That, three (3) more National Law Universities namely Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU- Mumbai) Mumbai, Maharashtra National Law University (MNLUAurangabad) Aurangabad and National Law University (NLU-Nagpur) Nagpur have also joined in and are participating in conduct of Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”).
6.5
That, as per the terms of Memorandum of Understanding between Admission
National Test
Law
Universities,
(“CLAT”)
is
Common
conducted
by
Law
rotation
depending on the year of establishment of the respective National Law University. Accordingly, the first Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) was conducted in year 2008 by National Law School of India University (NLSIU) Bangalore.
6.6 On 20.12.2017, National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi issued a circular bearing circular number
NUALS/CLAT2018/951/03/2017
inviting
applications for admissions to the Under Graduate and Post
Graduate
Degree
programmes
in
Law
in
the
Nineteen (19) National Law Universities in India. True Copy
of
Circular
No.
NUALS/CLAT2018/951/03/2017
dated 20.12.2017 issued by Respondent No. 2 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-1” (Page Nos ___ to ___)
6.7
As per this circular, the basic educational qualification was set out for Under Graduate programme and Post Graduate programme. The date for commencement of submission of Online Application was 01.01.2018 and the last date for submission was fixed for 31.03.2018. The
date for holding Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 was 13.05.2018.
6.8
That all the students were instructed to visit the official website of CLAT 2018 (www.clat.ac.in) for detailed instructions including Syllabus, Eligibility, Exam Pattern and list of important dates and instructions. True Copy of Instructions for submission of online application issued by Respondent No. 2 dated NIL are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-2” (Page Nos ___ to ___)
6.9
On 01.01.2018, online CLAT portal started to accept applications of students for the Under Graduate and Post Graduate
courses
of
Law.
All
the
aspirants
were
mandatorily required to submit online application and all the
necessary
instructions
and
notifications
were
conveyed through the online portal itself. The procedure for filling up the application form was set out on the Online CLAT portal.
6.10
The
National
(NUALS)
University
Kochi
was
the
of
Advanced designated
Legal
Studies
University
for
conducting Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018. Hon‟ble Vice-Chancellor of NUALS Kochi was designated as the Convener of “CLAT 2018 Core Committee” being the Vice-Chancellor of the conducting University. Hon‟ble Vice-Chancellor(s)
of
all
Nineteen
(19)
participating
National Law Universities were members in the “CLAT 2018 Core Committee”.
6.11
That
another
Committee,
Implementation
Committee”
namely
the
was
setup
“CLAT for
2018
smooth
implementation of CLAT 2018 comprising of Registrar(s) of all Nineteen (19) National Law Universities.
6.12
That on the last date for submission of online application i.e., 31.03.2018 approximately 60,000 students from all parts of India submitted their duly filled in application forms and deposited requisite fees to appear for CLAT 2018. Petitioners had also submitted their application forms and made the necessary fee deposit.
6.13
That on 20.04.2018, as per the instructions made available on the Online portal of CLAT 2018, students were instructed to download their Admit Cards/ Hall Tickets
starting
from
20.04.2018.
However,
the
petitioners noticed that Respondent No. 2 and 3 had uploaded a Disclaimer on the website stating as follows: “Owing to some technical reasons, the downloading of Admit Card will commence only from April 26, 2018.
Note: It is relevant to mention that CLAT 2018 was expected to be a completely online examination. All the instructions prior to the exam were also to be issued through the online portal itself. That right from the very beginning there were several technical mis-happenings which ultimately resulted in extremely poor, unfair and arbitrary conduct of CLAT 2018. 6.14
That
on
26.04.2018,
Petitioners
and
all
the
other
students were able to download their Admit Cards from the website of CLAT 2018 and the said Admit Card came with
a
particular
set
of
instructions
for
online
examination. It is relevant to mention that the entire interface for CLAT 2018 Examination was modified by Respondent No. 2 and 3. There was a remarkable shift from the online interface followed from 2015 i.e., the year when CLAT was first conducted as an online examination. To the surprise of the Petitioners, a new testing interface was presented inter alia with section tags and de-tags that caused serious problem to all the students appearing for the examination including the Petitioners herein. That the instructions issued along with the admit cards was the first instance of communication of such sweeping changes made by Respondent No. 2 and 3 for online CLAT examination 2018.
True Copy of Admit Cards of Petitioner No. 1 to 6 dated NIL are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P3” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
6.15 That Zee Media Bureau and Indian Express carried articles on their web portal highlighting the issue of delay in release of CLAT 2018 Admit Cards. True Copy of Article dated 20.04.2018 published by Express Web Desk of Indian Express is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-4” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
True Copy of Article dated 21.04.2018 published by Zee Media
Bureau
is
annexed
herewith
and
marked
as
Annexure “P-5” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
6.16 That on 13.05.2018, Petitioners appeared for CLAT 2018 examination at their respective centers. About 58,000 students appeared for the CLAT 2018 examination in a total of 260 examination centers set up across India. This examination was conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3 with the aid and assistance of a private company namely M/s Sify Technologies Ltd. That the terms of understanding between the Respondent No. 2 and M/s Sify Technologies Ltd were never disclosed to the public at large and the Petitioners herein.
6.17 That the students across various States of India faced serious
problems
in
almost
200
Online
Examination
Centers. The problems included power cuts, failure of login system, slow biometric verification, blank screens, substantial loss of time in system log-ins, frequent resetting of computer systems and difficulties in moving from one question to another.
6.18 That primarily these difficulties led to significant loss of time (averaging about 5-30 minutes from student to student) which has totally vitiated the very essence of an online competitive exam of 120 minutes wherein a student is expected to answer 200 questions. In such a highly competitive
and
rigorous
examination,
loss
of
time
essentially means fait accompli for the aspirations of any student. It is relevant to mention that the ranking of a student can slip by thousand or more ranks by a simple difference of one or two incorrect answers/ un-attempted questions.
In
such
circumstances
when
the
severe
technical lapses are viewed, it essentially means gross violation of fundamental rights of students under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
6.19 That in addition to these gross technical problems, students faced several other issues such as extremely poor
infrastructure of examination centers, lack of proper guidance from staff recruited by the examination centers and several instances of unfair conduct of examination. For instance, at an examination center as Hissar, Haryana few students were seen attempting the examination till 7:00 PM whereas the exam was expected to conclude at 5:00 PM itself. In essence, it is submitted that Petitioners and thousands
of
other
similarly
situated
students
were
compelled to take the examination under grossly unfair condition seriously jeopardizing their result. The final outcome or rank list prepared out of such an examination is bound to be erroneous and grossly unjust.
6.20
That
the
magnitude
of
mismanagement
and
gross
irregularity in conduct of examination can also be deciphered from the several other article published by websites
such
as
www.youthkiawaaz.com,
www.barandbench.com, www.lawoctopus.com.
True Copy of Article dated 13.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018 conducted today amidst server crashes, ruckus, glitches Nationally published by Online Portal Youthkiawaaz is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-6” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
6.21 On 14.05.2018, an interview of Vice-Chancellor of NUALS Kochi
was
published
by
website
namely
(www.
legallyindia.com) wherein it was reported that 98.5% of CLAT 2018 went smoothly and that there have been reports regarding the computes crashing at some of the centers. Assuming the figures to be correct, it can be safely concluded that about thousand (1000) students admittedly faced technical difficulties which is a sufficient ground for cancellation of entire CLAT 2018 examination. It has to be noted that CLAT 2018 is a competitive examination wherein ranking of students significantly varies
even
in
a
gap
of
1
or
2
marks.
In
such
circumstances, if about thousand (1000) students were not given fair opportunity for attempting the examination, it would lead to entire rank list being unfair and unjust.
True Copy of Article dated 14.05.2018 published by LegallyIndia Online Portal is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-7” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
True Copy of Article dated 14.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018 Mismanaged, Calls for Retest Echo Nationally published by Online Portal Youthkiawaaz is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-8” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
6.22 That gross technical errors and unfair conditions of examination lead to widespread public outcry. Several newspapers, websites, blogging portals reported of
remarkably poor conduct of CLAT 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3. This includes articles published in Indian Express, Youth Ki Awaaz, Legally India, Lawoctopus, Bar and Bench, Zee Media etc. On 15.05.2018, Indian Express also reported that conduct of CLAT 2018 was hit by technical glitches and mismanagement.
True Copy of Article dated 15.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018 hits with technical glitches and misman0agement published by Education Desk of Indian Express, New Delhi is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-9” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
True Copy of Article dated 15.05.2018 titled Tip of CLAT 2018 Iceberg keeps growing: At least 1400 Students have serious complaints as published by Legally India Online Portal is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P10” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
6.23 That the Petitioners are filing this Writ Petition setting out their
grievances
and
instances
of
violation
of
their
fundamental rights. Additionally, it is also stated that students from more than 20 states are gravely prejudiced by unfair, unjust and mismanaged conduct of CLAT 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3. In view of extremely time
available the present Petition is filed by 6 students from three (3) different states i.e., Delhi and Chhattisgarh. However, more than 500 similarly situated students are likely to join the present Petition in immediate future.
6.24 That on 15.05.2017, a number of online platforms including
Twitter
and
Facebook
carried
hundreds
of
discussions about mismanagement and technical glitches that vitiated the entire CLAT 2018 examination. A Google Form Questionnaire was uploaded on the internet seeking response of genuine exam takes and students who appeared for CLAT 2018. It is appalling to mention that within a day of the Google Form/Questionnaire going online, more than one thousand (1000) students have reported issues about technical glitches, infrastructural short comings and illegalities committed in conduct of CLAT 2018.
6.25 That
the
Petitioners
herein
duly
submitted
their
representation to the Respondent No. 2 and 3 herein informing serious issues in conduct of examination. In the Emails sent by the Petitioners to the Respondent No. 2 and 3 it was clearly mentioned that entire exam was marred by technical problems, server shutdown, hanging of computer systems, numerous power cuts, difficulty in login, blank screens and errors in biometric verification.
True Copy of Representation dated ___.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. ___ is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-11” (Page Nos ___ to ___). True Copy of Representation dated __.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. ___ is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-12” (Page Nos ___ to ___). True Copy of Representation dated __.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. ____ is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-13” (Page Nos ___ to ___). True Copy of Representation dated __.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. ___ is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-14” (Page Nos ___ to ___). True Copy of Representation dated __.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 2 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-15” (Page Nos ___ to ___). True Copy of Representation dated __.05.2018 submitted by Petitioner No. 2 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-16” (Page Nos ___ to ___).
6.26 That the entire CLAT 2018 Examination stands vitiated due its erroneous and improper conduct, which is bound to lead to a flawed merit list. It is also essential to mention that inspite of submission of Representation by the Petitioners
and thousands of other students/ law aspirants, no response till date has been sent by the Respondent No. 2 and 3 herein. As usual, the Respondent No. 2 and 3 seek to take advantage of the fixed examination schedule to dodge the genuine grievances raised by Petitioners herein. That this arbitrary conduct of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 amounts
to
violation
of
fundamental
rights
of
the
Petitioners guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
7.
That as per the schedule of CLAT 2018 examination, result along with rank list of the students is likely to be declared on May 31, 2018. The entire exercise is going to result in flawed
merit
list
since
more
than
thousand
(1000)
students have admittedly faced problems ranging from technical difficulty, server breakdown, power cuts,
login
issues, difficulty in managing exam interface, problems in bio-metric verification. In addition to this several other issues such as poor examination infrastructure, lack of competent
invigilators
and
total
apathy
shown
by
Respondent No. 2 and 3 leaves no room for doubt that the CLAT 2018 examination must be re-conducted in light of suitable instructions to be issued by this Hon‟ble Court.
8.
That as per the information available on websites, few students have already approached Hon‟ble High Court(s) at
Jaipur, Delhi and Chandigarh raising similar grievances. Since the students who are aggrieved by arbitrary actions of Respondent No. 2 and 3 hail from several states of Union of India, it would be in the interest of justice to entertain the present Petition. In short, the tiny window between the declaration of exam results and admissions constitutes a perfect fait accompli for the CLAT authorities, causing serious harm to all students, both present and future and impacts the integrity of the CLAT filter and the future of legal education.
GROUNDS 9.
That the Petitioners are approaching this Hon‟ble Court on the following grounds which are taken without prejudice to one another:
A.
Because Common Law Admission Test 2018 conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3 is the single window admission mechanism for students aspiring for admission to primer National
Law
Universities
based
at
seventeen
(17)
different states of Union of India. The entire CLAT 2018 examination
is
vitiated
due
to
widespread
mismanagement, technical problems and infrastructural issues which are solely on account of gross negligence exhibited by the Respondent No. 2 and Respondent No. 3 herein.
B.
Because CLAT 2018 was designed to wholly be conducted online and thus required flawless implementation in terms of
uninterrupted
server
operation,
reliable
computer
hardware and user friendly examination interface. The entire CLAT 2018 examination was vitiated due to issues such as blank screens, hanging of computer systems, recurrent power cuts, discrepancies in time allotted to various candidates and gross infrastructural deficiencies.
C.
Because
CLAT
2018
is
a
merit
based
competitive
examination. In other words, position of the Petitioners in the rank list would drastically vary even based on score gap of one (1) or two (2) marks. In such an examination with limited time frame of 120 minutes, loss of time due to technical issues may render the entire effort of Petitioners futile.
D.
Because Petitioners and thousands of other students who appeared in the examination (CLAT 2018) prepared for several
months
National
Law
to
seek
Universities.
admission The
into
entire
prestigious
effort
of
the
Petitioners would be rendered useless if Respondent No. 2 and
3
are
submitted
permitted by
them.
to It
ignore is
the
humbly
representations submitted
that
Respondent No. 2 and 3 cannot be permitted to take
advantage of their own wrong. It would be gross miscarriage of justice if the Respondents are permitted to take the defence of strict exam timeline at the cost of future of Petitioners.
E.
Because the Respondent No. 2 and 3 have failed to address the representations submitted by Petitioner No. 1 to 6. There is clear violation of fundamental rights guaranteed to the Petitioners under Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India. Further, Respondent No. 3 has ignored widespread outcry of students across the nation calling for a re-examination. Till date, the CLAT 2018 Core Committee has not even uploaded a circular to explain the steps
proposed
to
be
taken
by
them
in
view
of
representation submitted by students across India.
F.
Because the final rank list /merit list based on flawed examination process of CLAT 2018 is bound to be as arbitrary as the process which has selected the students. Respondent No. 2 and 3 ought to have constituted a committee of external experts to submit a report about widespread
problems
faced
by
students
regarding
examination server and examination infrastructure. To the contrary, inspite of offering a window regarding the submission of grievances, Respondent No. 2 and 3 have
not
even
acknowledged
submission
grievances/
representations by the Petitioners herein.
G.
Because in a highly competitive examinations like CLAT 2018, there must be no scope for any error whatsoever. It is in interest of future of Indian Legal Education and Legal Profession that the impugned examination be quashed with a direction for fresh and impeccable conduct of Common Law Admission Test.
H.
Because by virtue of being opaque, ad-hoc, arbitrary, inconsistent, and plagued by severe procedural defects in conducting the examination, the conduct of Respondents No. 2 and 3 in hosting CLAT examination 2018 has resulted in a serious breach of the rights of students under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
I.
Because the rotation practice that has conferred the right to conduct an examination marred with innumerable problems,
to
an
inexperienced
university
such
as
Respondent No. 2 and 3 has lead to pulverizing the fate of the students and thereby resulting in a gross violation of Article 14 and Article 21.
J.
Because the Petitioners have a limited window to approach before this Hon‟ble Court, on account of the deliberate
inaction of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 in conveniently waiting to formally declare the result on 31.05.2018. The Respondents are well aware that results once declared will seal the fate of the Petitioners and other similarly situated individuals forever, and therefore have chosen not to act on the representation filed by the Petitioners.
K.
BECAUSE even otherwise, the Respondent No, 2 and 3 are instrumentalities of the State since these are National Law Universities
constituted
under
an
act
of
the
State
Legislature, and therefore it is incumbent and a positive obligation of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to ensure that the process of selection of the students is in strict conformity with the principles of transparency, fair play, and accountability. The manner in which the examination was conducted on the fateful day of 13.05.2018 has severely tarnished the future of the students beyond repair and has consequently violated Part III.
L.
Because, the very semblance of “Equal Opportunity” preserved and protected under Article 16 is lost if the Common Entrance Examination of such a stature is marred with
replete
instances
of
gross
negligence
and
mismanagement. The most severely affected category would be that of students who are meritorious and have invested countless hours over months, if not years,
preparing to make their names in prestigious National Law Universities.
M.
Because, on having paid a certain amount for the purpose of buying the application form, the Petitioners have a legitimate expectation that atleast the manner in which the examination will be conducted would be transparent and fair. It is the affirmative duty of the State to ensure that the amount spent is utilized. The conduct of examination demonstrably suggests that the amount so spent by the students was not utilized in devising a system which could ensure that the examinations would confirm with the high standards befitting the stature of National Law Universities.
N.
Because
the
lack
mismanagement devastating
of
of the
transparency
and
examination
has
consequences,
and
runs
the
gross
resulted in
in
absolute
contravention to the principles enunciated by this Hon‟ble Court in the case of Modern Dental College & Research Centre v. State of M.P. (2016) 7 SCC 353.
O.
BECAUSE there was no uniformity in the manner in which the invigilators were to handle situations arising due to technical glitches. The extension of time was therefore subjectively exercised, in absence of any uniform policy, and largely to the whim of the invigilators who had no
clear instructions in this regard. This resulted in different time extensions for different students, who were partaking in the same entrance examination. In many cases the examination lasted for 1.30 Hours only, whereas in other centers the examination went on for about 4 hours. This completely effaces the spirit of Article 14.
10.
That the Petitioners have not filed any other similar petition before this Hon‟ble Court or any other Hon‟ble High Court.
11.
That the present Petition is filed by only six (6) Petitioners due to paucity of time. It is respectfully submitted that several similarly placed students who had also appeared for CLAT 2018 examination have similar grievances as is expressed by the Petitioners herein in the present Writ Petition. Petitioners seek liberty of this Hon‟ble Court to add or amend the Memo of Parties or file necessary applications as and when other similarly situated students join them. Petitioners also crave liberty to add any other ground which may be relevant for the adjudication of the present Writ Petition in the interest of justice. PRAYER In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and on the
grounds mentioned herein above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon‟ble Court may graciously be pleased to:
(a)
Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Common
Law
Admission
Test
2018
examination
conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3 held on 13.05.2018 as per circular dated 20.12.2017; and (b)
Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 2 and 3 Common
Law
to conduct fresh examination for Admission
Test
(CLAT)
qua
the
Petitioners within a reasonable period of time; and
(c)
Issue an appropriate order or direction staying the publication of final result cum merit list till the disposal of the present Writ Petition; and
(d)
Issue an appropriate order or direction appointing a committee of experts to examine the grounds raised by Petitioners in their representations submitted to Respondent No. 2 and 3 with a direction to submit a report in a time bound manner; and
(e)
Any other and further order(s) or direction (s) as this Hon‟ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY
Filed By:
(ANAND SHANKAR JHA) Advocate for Petitioners V-5/B Green Park Extension New Delhi – 110016 LL: 011-49059255/ 09899617989
Place: New Delhi Drawn on: ___.05.2018 Filed on: 18.05.2018
